Woman Ordered To Make Her Kids Visit Her Rapist
Published by McBoing May 5th, 2006 in Moola, Rape, When Dads Go BadWhen your convicted rapist is known to your children as “Daddy,” you might find that you are required to ensure his visitation rights while he rots his ass in prison and plots ways to continue to control you:
In a quiet, unwavering tone, Kim Linetty chronicles the events of the day nearly four years ago in step-by-step clarity.
She details the multiple phone calls to police, her screams to neighbors and the swelling sense of dread that something horrible was about to happen to her.
Then Linetty tells of the attack — how he wrestled her to the ground, punched her in the head, pulled down her pants and raped her, covering her mouth and threatening death during the assault.
I can already tell this guy is a great father.
“A day doesn’t go by that I don’t think about what happened,” she says.
Linetty’s voice grows louder and firmer when the conversation turns to a judge’s ruling ordering her to take her three children to the Indiana State Prison, where the man convicted of raping her that day is serving time for the crime.
The ruling angers and mystifies Linetty, who says she has no intention of following the order despite the risk of a contempt of court charge.
“He wasn’t a father when he was free, so I don’t know what gives him the right to be a father now,” said Linetty, 33, of South Bend. “I didn’t think a judge in his right mind would order this to happen.”
Others have responded to this frightening case and the swarm of Father’s Rights groups who praise the judge for being so thoughtful of the best interests of the children. The best part of this awful story (and by “best” I mean “most disgusting”):
Weldy [the rapist, if you've forgotten --ed.] , according to Linetty’s account of the proceedings that are closed to reporters to protect the children, is attempting to file a request with the judge that Linetty be held in contempt of court for failing to obey the order.
If Linetty disobeys the judge’s order and is charged with contempt, everyone loses, said Leving, the Chicago attorney.
“She could end up in jail with him and then you have both parents incarcerated, and that’s a benefit to no one,” Leving said.
Everyone’s solution? Get her a caseworker!
Just in case I haven’t cleared this up for you, case workers are for the very rich and the very poor. No private insurance covers case management and only one Medicaid package does. This Medicaid package is reserved for the broke, the profoundly mentally ill, and sometimes, adopted children who will be in need of services for the duration of their childhoods. Caseworkers don’t grow on trees, in other words, and somebody has to pay for them — and that money either comes from the state or from your own precious wallet.
Which is why I’m stoked that somebody brought this up. On this post at Majikthise, Lauren says:
As a case worker, I’m finding that money is a problem in cases like these. Unless this woman is dead-ass broke — or the court arranges something for her if she is broke — she’s going to have to pay out of pocket for a case worker to take her kids to the prison. On a sliding scale fee, the lowest amount we offer for case management services is $10 an hour. You wouldn’t believe how this adds up over time.
Nevertheless, it isn’t just so simple as to “arrange for a case worker.” No person should be required to pay to have their kids taken to see their rapist.
Lindsey’s response is that some progressive politician in Indiana *cough* ahem *cough* …excuse me.
Lindsey’s response is that some progressive politician in Indiana ought to “sponsor a bill mandating that that the state pick up the tab for casework under these circumstances.” And:
If the dad has any money at all, he should have to contribute as well. Let him prove that he really wants to see his kids by chipping in some of his commissary money for an escort.
If he actually did contribute, I’d be impressed and much more favorably disposed towards the idea of him seeing the kids at all. It’s one thing to ask other people to deliver your kids to you in jail at no cost to you, it’s quite another to be willing to work hard to make it possible. It would be way for him to acknowledge that he caused his victim so much pain that she can’t even be expect to see him.
Which is a great idea. But not what the judge ordered. And in the meantime, if this woman has a full-time job she’s probably going to pay out of pocket for case management services, even if she does get them on a sliding scale fee. Like Lauren says, these services add up over time even with rates so low as $10/hour. I have clients who desperately need my services, but with whom I spend only an hour a week because they can’t afford the extra $40-60 a month it takes to get said services at a minimum, whatever they are, all of which is determined by an arbitrary cut-off line saying that you earn too much to have access to a service that will improve your life and your childrens’ lives. I have to turn away the others.
I don’t know anything about Linnerty except that she has an incredibly tough road ahead of her. My heart goes out to her during this awful battle she is about to fight. But in my mind, in this case, fuck the ACLU and prisoners rights. Let the woman be. Let her children be. Let the rapist serve his time and attempt to clean up his mess once he is out — preferably after a lot of therapy that he, and not his ex, pays for.
This is so horrible. If I ever saw a reason for a person to flee the country, this is it. I sure would be tempted if I were in her position.
Thanks for blogging on this and bringing it to my attention.
I don’t know about fleeing the country… maybe a revision of laws and customs is more appropriately in order. (Along with a swift kick to the ass of a certain judge.)
To think that rapists have such rights as child visitation, let alone any degree of custody, is absurd.
anyone know if there’s a petition to sign, or a phone number to call for the woman?
I agree - the turd wants to see his kids? Hire a social worker. With his money. End of story.
“The courts have recognized, when examining the facts and circumstances, it is beneficial to children to maintain a relationship with their father,” McCormick said. “We need to trust the courts’ decisions on that.”
Wait one second…. I was distinctly under the impression that “Men’s Right’s” groups had gathered together under the banner of fighting unjust court decisions about divorce, allamony, custody and visitaion rights. I see though, that THIS court ruling is one that should be trusted implicity and without question of bias. Obviously.
Additionally, the “facts and circumstances” mentioned that seem to suggest that “it is beneficial to children to maintain a relationship with their father” actually are studies that note the correlation between healthy developement and having contact with BOTH parents as opposed to ONE parent. The assumtion that this necessarily means FATHERS are the ones being jilted out of their fair custody (as we know is their actual viewpoint)belies their comedic suggestion that they are, in fact, standing up for the rights of jilted parents of either gender, including physically abused men. As if pretending to not aknowledge the disparity between male and female domestic violence isn’t enough, they claim to be attempting to help male victims of violenc by trying to shut down abuse shelters for women. Also, these studies showing better developement of children with their fathers around ignore the cause and effect relationship that seperation of any kind has on children, and the more frequently unhealthy, low-income or unhappy homelives that coincide with many eventual seperations.
As a woman I am constantly horrified to see the most basic rights and privileges of everyone except women being afforded such intense scrutany. Finally, if you were at all interested in the ideology of these “Father’s” groups, check this out, some unbiased myth-busting from http://www.angryharry.com/
“Were Women Oppressed in the West? - No. Not compared to the oppression faced by men.”
“Men Earn Quarter of a Million Pounds more than Women - but it mostly gets spent on women”
“Did Women Really Want To Go Out To Work? - no, they did not ”
“Is the Training of Women Doctors A Waste of Money? - yep ”
“[Are} Men..More 'Domestically Violent' Towards Women than are Women Towards Men[?] Not True. Only Women Are Offered An Alternative To Domestic Violence - which is why they are more often killed by their partners than are men.”
Oh, LMFAO, is that why?
Only Women Are Offered An Alternative To Domestic Violence - which is why they are more often killed by their partners than are men.”
I’ve read that every way I can think of, and I’m no closer to understanding what the fuck that’s supposed to be disproving.
Ohhh. He’s saying that only women are offered an alternative to perpetrating domestic violence, which is why more men commit domestic violence.
I have an alternative that’s gender neutral: DON’T FUCKING HIT YOUR PARTNER.
I agree with Auguste “gender neutral: DON’T FUCKING HIT YOUR PARTNER”.
That’s what opposers of VAWA wanted, but feminist groups are too strong and well financed.
I think sevyn meant this: “Only Women Are Offered An Alternative To Domestic Violence - which is why men are more often killed by their partners.”
Domestic Abuse Centers antion wide, which provide safe places, new starts, programs, medical attention, etc. only provide these services for women and boys under 12. Men and boys older than 12 have no where to go but the streets or stay in the abusive situation and hope not to be killed.
Sunday, February 5, 2006
California Mother’s Triple Murders Show
Cost of Ignoring Female Abusers
By Glenn Sacks
It is a well-known story–a violent husband abuses his wife and others, the wife stays with him out of fear or shame, and in the end the husband kills the wife, or the children, or both. We shake our heads and say “If only we could have protected her.”
Such is the scenario of the Socorro Caro triple murders, except that this time the genders are reversed. The Southern California case is an extreme example of the price children, fathers, and our society as a whole sometimes pay for our refusal to acknowledge female domestic violence.
Socorro Caro, according to testimony by several witnesses, including her husband Dr. Xavier Caro, had violently attacked her husband or others on eight occasions prior to the night of November 22, 1999, when she shot and killed three of her four sons. In these previous incidents Ms. Caro had used weapons and the element of surprise to her advantage, and had caused several injuries, including serious eye damage to her husband.
Why didn’t Dr. Caro leave her? Why didn’t he tell anybody what was being done to him?
“I was ashamed. I was embarrassed,” he testified recently during the penalty phase of Socorro Caro’s trial. According to other reports, he was also skeptical that authorities would believe him.
Thanks to the noble efforts of women’s activists, had Ms. Caro been the victim of abuse at the hands of Dr. Caro, help would have been available. Ms. Caro could have moved with her children to a shelter. Using the legal services of the shelter, she could have filed a restraining order against her violent husband, and filed for divorce. She would have received custody of her four children, their home, half or more of the family’s financial assets, and substantial child support. In addition, she probably would have been able to eliminate her abusive husband’s visitation rights.
Had Dr. Caro, a male victim of domestic violence, felt that the legal system would give his claims the same credence that an abused woman’s claims receive, his three children would probably still be alive today.
Are female child abuse and domestic violence rare? Unfortunately not. According to the US Department of Justice, 70% of confirmed cases of child abuse and 65% of parental murders of children are committed by mothers.
Veteran domestic violence researchers Richard Gelles, Murray Straus, and Susan Steinmetz, who were once hailed by the women’s movement for their pioneering work on violence against women, have repeatedly found that women are as likely as men to physically attack their spouses or partners.
California State Long Beach Psychology professor Martin Fiebert has compiled and summarized 117 different studies with over 72,000 respondents that found that most domestic violence is mutual and, in the cases where there was only one abusive partner, that partner was as likely to be female as male.
Crime statistics do not bear out what researchers know because women tend to be seriously injured more often than men, and because men, for various reasons, are far less likely than women to report the abuse against them.
As the Caro case shows, by allowing abusive women to go unacknowledged and unpunished, female abusers are encouraged to believe that they can get away with their abuse indefinitely, which frequently results in escalating violence.
Why didn’t Dr. Caro seek help? Besides shame and denial, many men hesitate to report their wives’ violence because they fear that once the police are involved, the wife will accuse her husband of being the perpetrator and it is she, not he, who will be believed. This is, in fact, what Ms. Caro tried to do during her murder trial, claiming that it was her husband, not her, who committed the murders. Draconian mandatory arrest laws often direct police to make an arrest, even when the abuse is mutual (as research shows is generally the case), or when it is unclear who the perpetrator is. While arrests of women account for a third or more of domestic violence arrests in some states, police generally are pressured to arrest the man, even when the evidence is scant.
What could Dr. Caro have done? There are few domestic violence shelters which accept men, though in this case he probably would have had enough money to pay for other accommodations. He would have had difficulty winning a custody battle, particularly with the well-documented willingness of women in danger of losing custody to make false accusations of abuse or child molestation. Quite possibly these accusations or other legal machinations could have led to Ms. Caro being granted custody of the children, and even to Dr. Caro losing visitation rights. Thus his children could have been in the care of and under the control of an abuser without even the limited protection he could provide by staying with her.
Thus Xavier Caro was trapped–not just by his violent wife, but by a society that refuses to acknowledge what voluminous research and simple common sense shows–domestic violence is not a male affliction but a human one.
sweetie “me again” - this would all be lovely and shit, except… have you actually ever gone through domestic abuse scenario? Do you have any idea of what’s typically involved?
‘Cause fucking guess what? I do.
I’ve been in an abusive relationship before, and so have my husband and his child. I was able to stand by them and help them get out of their situation, because I know how hard it is. ‘Course, I got attached in the process, which is how come I say “my husband”, and not “this dude I know”.
And you know what? In reality, you know, the situations that are not from Law and Order or MRA-land, it’s not as easy as all that to falsely accuse anyone of abuse. You can file an initial restraining order comparatively easily, but it’s not a permanent one (at least in my state), especially if your abuser files a protest (and if kids are involved, good luck with keeping the restraining order).
Also, in reality, there are usually behavioral patterns that can be used to prove that your partner is abusive. (It’s fucking hard in every case and fucking really hard in cases of mental and emotional abuse) We do not live in vaccuum, and people see stuff. They may not say anything until shit hits the fan, or they might not have put two and two together. Even though none of my friends knew beforehand that I was going through hell, after I left the dude and started the process a lot of them called and were like, “Well, fuck, now a lot of things make sense.” My husband’s ex called the cops on him several times, and both times the cops left without making an arrest because they said it was pretty clear who was the abused one. My husband never filed a report (which would’ve made things easier when he did leave) because he was under impression that his son would be taken away from him, should his now-ex go to jail. Which is not true, btw.
The important thing is to find a lawyer who has experience with abuse cases, because there are a lot of abuse-specific characteristics. For example, an abuser keeps his or her victim by manipulation (in my husband’s case, the child was “it”) and so it will typically take around 4 failed tries before the victim will leave permanently. God, I’ve come back more than I can admit. So the abuser’s lawyer will try to say, “Oh, come on, she came back, so it must’ve not been so bad!” And it’s important to know how abuse works to refute their claim.
Also, no one jumps the gun if any side reports child abuse, even child sexual abuse. There are specialists (that are not covered by insurance, btw) that can do an evaluation, and then testify on their findings. And if the specialist concludes that the sex abuse claims are false, then guess what? The custody automaticaly is denied to the parent who claimed that the kids are abused. At least, again, in the state I lived at the time.
I could go on and on. But hey, if you’re so upset about abused men, why arencha fundraising for men’s shelters? That’s what feminists had to do to create women’s shelters. Would you donate your own money to a men’s shelter? Do you donate your own money to one of the few shelters that does accept men?
-crickets-
Mkay then.
elfinity, i would just like to take this opportunity to say that you elfing rock. _that_ was a thorough dismantling.
thanks o_O
your pun made my day, too
nothin’ like personal experience, eh?
Actually, it was easier for me to believe that my husband was being abused when I met him than it was for his macho co-workers, because for them to admit that a woman can have such power over a guy would be too much on a subconscious level. Prime example of patriarchy hurting everyone and proving it should be fought against. Which is what feminists do.
If I were a strawfeminist, though, instead of helping, I would probably say something like, “Well, how’d you like them tables turned? MWA-HA-HA!”
elfinity. You are so full of hate and rage, I’m not going to read your post. I avoid potential abusers.
I was a victim of a very abusive mother who eventually got arrested for attacking the police officer asking her questions.
I’ve seen and witnessed many abusive relationships and I feel for those incapapble of getting help because of feminist portraying only women as victims, and men are only victimizers. This sexist attitude has caused the deaths of millions of silent victims that were ignored because they just happened to be born male.
I agree with Mr. Punkass. You are an “elfing rock”, but the problem of abuse will only be solve with people capable of feeling, empathizing, and sympathizing with the victims no matter what gender, race, or ecominic back ground they come from.
I really hope you find a way to handel all you’re blind rage and anger. I did absolutely nothing warranting such a haterfilled response. Perhaps you’re a man who’s use to intimidating women into being quiet.. I really don’t know, but I hope you attend some kind of anger management program because they can help peple like you.
God bless you, and I’ll pray for you.
oh! You’re a feminist! Oh I see why you’re against helping men. Well, you’re the reason why many heterosexual women aren’t feminist. You’re and ugly person. You recognize unfair treatment, but you’re just happy it’s against a sex you’re not interested in.
Not that I have anything against lesbians. I just don’t think the man-hating boy-bashing is a good color on you.
BWA-HA-HA!!! Oh, dear, this is so funny.
If you actually read my post, you’d see how stupid your “noble” response was.
Are you saying my son and my husband aren’t men? They would be really surprised to hear that.
As it happens, I do have a pretty good “handel” on things, but I do have zero tolerance against any abusers and those who would excuse them or avoid looking at the problem as it stands. If you want to call it hate, feel free, but it’s more of a rage, actually.
You’re the one who’s hateful and also not bold enough to just come out and admit it.
If your heart was really bleeding for the poor abused men, are you organizing a shelter? Are you donating money to those few already existing ones that admit men? Are you spreading awareness by handing out fliers on your own free time? Are you organizing fundraisers? Any of that?
Or are you going to hide behind “I’ll pray for you?” bullshit again?
Unfortunately, delusions are not easily cured. Oh, and for the record? Anger management classes have a very poor track record when it comes to “curing” abusers, because one can only change if he or she wants to, and most abusers don’t. So if I were one, it wouldn’t really help.
And dummy, if you noticed, I talked mostly about my husband’s plight, not mine. OH WAIT! You didn’t bloody read my comment! Oh, silly me.
Well, when you come back from the la-la-land, you might want to actually read it, might learn something.